About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
's not going to be any opportunity to cut pentagon spending in any serious way if you don't go over the cliff. so there is some stuff in there that i as a democrat don't like. but i think everybody's going to put something in the pot in order to balance the deficit. we did a lousy job in january on the tax side and i hope that -- i think it's better to go over the cliff than do a lousy job -- >> how many people do you know on your side of the field who actually agree with you? >> very few. look they're politicians. they want to spend as much money as they possibly can and they don't want to pay for it. >> who agrees with you? >> oh, i don't know. i bet -- oh, god, joe agrees with me. >> you forgot. the other thing, howard, and i'm just alluding to it, there will be no return to the bush era tax rates on anyone under $400,000? >> right. >> okay. so take that amount of money, whatever that is per year. how much do you need -- how many loopholes do you need to close? what is the marginal rate have to be on people above 400 to replace that potential revenue? it's 100%, isn't it? >> but i don't --
taking the civilian workers when our country is still at war at the pentagon and putting them on four days a week work is still waste. let those who think they've identified waste and no doubt there are efficiencies that can be found put their proposals forward and let those proposals be weighed in the context of a balanced approach. the question isn't whether we should leave any category immune. the question is whether we should have a balanced approach. and to assume, before anyone has laid out any kind of vision of how that $85 billion a year could be cut, that it must be possible and that everything else has to be ruled out seems to me to be a extraordinarily irresponsible approach. of course there are instances of waste in the federal government. there are also instances of huge unmet needs of diseases where we could find cures that save tens of thousands of people's lives in the next several years. but we're cutting the budget instead and denying ourselves the chances to find those cures. of infrastructure investments where we're risking more bridges collapsing and all we're doi
, you don't care. >> i guess, but i don't. i don't care. >>> the pentagon chief for the f-35 warplane is slamming his partner lockheed martin. he's accusing them of trying to squeeze every nickel out of the u.s. government faults them for seeing the long-term benefits of the project. >>> and tesla ceo eland musk vowing to pay back an energy deficit loan in half the time required by the government. the company receives a doe loan in 2010 and made the first payment of nearly $13 million in december. >> by the way, did you see yesterday -- remember we had -- there was a big debate about the test drive of the tesla in "the new york times." >> yeah. uh-huh. >> and phil lebeau -- >> went well. then edmonds did one yesterday. >> how did that go? >> not so well. the whole interior screen that sort of is the hub of the whole car, it stopped working. >> i don't understand this debate anyway. if you want to go a long trip like that, wouldn't you take a different car? rent a car or -- >> yeah. phil made the point. this is what you do -- >> andrew made the point, too. >> if you feel green and you
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3